Estate of Lumpkin v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Decedent's life was insured under a group term life insurance policy paid for entirely by his employer, and the beneficiaries of the policy were designated by the employer. Decedent's only substantive right under the policy was to select an optional mode of settlement which would spread payments to one of the beneficiaries, his spouse, over a longer period of time.
Read the full summary
Decedent's life was insured under a group term life insurance policy paid for entirely by his employer, and the beneficiaries of the policy were designated by the employer. Decedent's only substantive right under the policy was to select an optional mode of settlement which would spread payments to one of the beneficiaries, his spouse, over a longer period of time. Held, decedent did not possess any of the incidents of ownership of the policy within the meaning of sec. 2042, I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
Estate of James H. Lumpkin, Jr., Deceased, Christine T. Hamilton, Executrix, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Estate of Lumpkin v. Commissioner
Docket No. 1715-68
United States Tax Court
56 T.C. 815; 1971 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 98;
July 19, 1971, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 50.
Decedent's life was insured under a group term life insurance policy paid for entirely by his employer, and the beneficiaries of the policy were designated by the employer. Decedent's only substantive right under the policy was to select an optional mode of settlement which would spread…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Chase National Bank v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Boseman v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Commissioner v. Estate of HolmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- M. E. Blatt Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Lober v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.